![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 11:42:17PM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 07:19:32PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > My guess is that this read-side critical section can be invoked from and > > SMI, and that SMIs can occur even if interrupts are disabled. If my guess > > is wrong, please enlighten me. And feel free to ignore the next few > > paragraphs in that case, along with a number of my suggested changes, > > since they all depend critically on my guess being correct. > > Paul, it took me a bit to figure this out too, but Corey uses the TLA > "SMI" to mean "Systems Management Interface", not "Systems Management > Interrupt". From Documentation/IPMI.txt: > > ipmi_msghandler - This is the central piece of software for the IPMI > system. It handles all messages, message timing, and responses. The > IPMI users tie into this, and the IPMI physical interfaces (called > System Management Interfaces, or SMIs) also tie in here. > > > There are at least 4 basic types of physical hardware interfaces (BT, > SMIC, KCS, and I2C), which may (or more often, may not) have their own > hardware interrupt lines, but these are normal interrupts, not > CPU-magic "systems management interrupts". So I think this isn't a > problem. OK, thank you for the tutorial on the "other SMI"! The comments about turning synchronize_rcu() into synchronize_sched() and rcu_read_lock() into preempt_disable() do not apply, please ignore. However, I still do not understand how using RCU on cmd_rcvrs helps, given that all of the accesses that I could see were already protected by cmd_rcvrs_lock. Any further enlightenment available? Thanx, Paul - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-10-24 04:30 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||